The Decibel - How a new pipeline could test Canadian unity

Episode Date: October 10, 2025

A new pipeline pitch is stirring up an old fight. On Oct. 1, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced the province would be drawing up a proposal for a new oil pipeline to the B.C. coast by May. In the last week, B.C. Premier David Eby has voiced criticisms of the project and opposed Smith’s coinciding efforts to repeal laws affecting access to the coast. In recent days, the disagreement has escalated.Today, The Globe’s B.C. politics reporter, Justine Hunter, joins the show. She’ll share what we know about the pipeline Smith is proposing, why it’s stirring up familiar tensions between the provinces, and whether the project can survive Eby’s opposition.Questions? Comments? Ideas? Email us at [e-mail] Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

What the Conservatives in Alberta are pushing is an entirely political creation in the lead up to their election for wedge politics at the expense of British Columbia and Canada's economy. BC Premier David Eby posted a video on social media this week, criticizing Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's proposal to run a new oil pipeline to the BC coast. And Smith didn't exactly find the feedback, constructive. Well, I think Premier B's comments are un-Canadian and they're unconstitutional.

Smith is hoping this proposal will be accepted by the federal government's major project's office. And this puts Prime Minister Mark Carney in a tricky position. Separatist resentment is simmering in Alberta and could boil over if a pipeline is denied. But BC said it doesn't want this new project

and First Nations are mixed. This is all going to test the Prime Minister's plan to spur the economy and bring the country together through these big infrastructure projects. Today, the globe's BC politics reporter, Justine Hunter, joins the show. She'll share what we know about the pipeline Smith is proposing, why it's stirring up familiar tensions between the provinces, and whether the idea can survive opposition. I'm Cheryl Sutherland, and this is the decibel from the Globe and Mail.

Hi, Justine. Great to have you on the show. Hi, Cheryl. Thanks for having me. So Pipeline Talk is back. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced this proposed bitchamine pipeline. What's her pitch? Well, there's no firm route or budget, but the idea is to build a line across northern B.C. that it would end up in the port of Kitamat or maybe Prince Rupert to get Alberta oil to Asian markets.

It is notoriously difficult to get a pipeline built across British Columbian oil pipeline. lots of opposition on the West Coast from environmentalists from the provincial government, but particularly First Nations. So what the Premier is doing is setting up a Crown Corporation with some seed money to front the application because no private proponent wants to take it on at this point. Okay. And so you're saying they'll be facing a lot of opposition here. And it's interesting because Alberta already has a pipeline running through BC.

This is a Trans Mountain Pipeline. Why does Smith say that another one is needed? Well, the idea is that Alberta has a lot more oil to move, and they would like to tap into Asian markets. And really, this argument pivots right now on relations between Canada and the U.S. So Canada is by far the largest energy supplier to the U.S., and we don't want to be totally reliant on that relationship. But the issue with TMX, Trans Mountain, is it's not running at capacity right now.

at about 80%, so not fully subscribed. And British Columbia says there's lots of opportunity to kind of expand what we have with TMX and tweak it a bit so that you can get more oil moving through there without having to open up another pipeline. Ms. Smith argues that more capacity is needed to meet current and future demand. She says Alberta's oil reserves are valued at $9 trillion. And this is the time to try and look to other markets other than the United States. States to get that oil moving. And they want to use the northern B.C. route because that would

actually cut down the amount of transit time. So it would be a shorter route across the Pacific and therefore faster and cheaper to get to those markets. Okay. How is Alberta planning to pay for this new proposal? So initially the Alberta government says they'll put $14 million into this new Crown Corporation, but that they want eventually a private proponent to come forward or multiple proponents. So this would be, without a doubt, a multi-billion dollar pipeline. And the BC government is saying right now it looks like it's going to be taxpayers on the hook again, as it was with TMX. In the end, the only reason why Trans Mountain got finished was because the federal government stepped in when the private sector lost their stomach and they ended up paying taxpayers dollars,

$34 billion plus to get TMX finished. So you can see why private sector proponents are not keen to jump in and try this again at this point. So what Albert is doing is kind of greasing the skids. They'll support early planning, developing the cost estimates, they'll front the engagement and coming up with some kind of credible proposal for Ottawa to consider. The federal government has got this major project's office now. Mark Carney has said, you know, Canada is going to build baby bill. So, you know, Alberta is trying to take advantage of a mood right now. Yeah, and it's important that we highlight the cost here. You mentioned that TMX cost us $34 billion, which ended up being the most expensive infrastructure project in Canadian history.

And it was only meant to be $7.4 billion. So a pipeline is really expensive and it can balloon to. quite a bit of money here too. By plane is expensive, but it also becomes more expensive when you're having to fight all along the way with various proponents. So in the case of TMX, the attorney general of the day, who happened

to be the now Premier David Eby, promised to use every legal tool in the toolbox to try and stop it. It wasn't just the BC government that was opposing it. It was First Nations and also places like the city of Burnaby, the city of Vancouver, both sort

threw up whatever hurdles they could. And so they might not be able to stop a pipeline, but they can make it costly and slow to complete. You mentioned that Alberta is hoping for a private company to come on board. Has anyone put their hand up? No, they've got a couple of companies that are working with them to help frame this, including Enbridge, which, of course, was the proponent that tried to build Northern Gateway and failed. So they've, Ambridge should have some advice on how not to do things. And to avoid. But right now it is still, this is why David Eby, the BC Premier, keeps saying it's a non-existent project, is because there is no private sector proponent willing to step forward at this point. So you also mentioned that this is something that Danielle Smith is

hoping to come out of this major project office, which is the government's new office that is fast-tracking these big infrastructure projects. And she wants Prime Minister Mark Carney to commit to this proposal by mid-November. Why then? What's important about this timing? Well, it all seems to be hinging on the Great Cup. So she's laid down her demands. She wants a bunch of things done, including some major policy and legislation torn up and cleared a way to help encourage private sector proponents to get on board with this. All of it needs to be done before Grey Cup, which I'm told is November 16th. I'm not an expert in this department. But that happens to be when Mr. Carney says his major projects office will announce their second series of

projects that are going to be considered for being fast-tracked. So the idea is that if it is deemed to be in the national interest, that Canada will help clear hurdles and fast-track projects and help them get through permitting by kind of having a single project office to oversee any kind of permits, all the different groups and different departments that are normally involved. involved in a major project. So she wants her project on that list, but she also wants all these, what she calls, nine bad laws cleared ahead of Grey Cup. So I think they're hoping to have something to celebrate regardless of the outcome of that

football game. And nine bad laws. What's that all about? So one of the things that's consistently being raised by industry in Alberta, the oil industry, is that there are federal policies that have hindered their ability to get secure investments in Alberta oil. And one of them is Bill C-69, the Impact Assessment Act, which Alberta likes to call the No More Pipelines Bill.

There's a cap on greenhouse gas emissions that the industry wants lifted, and therefore, Alberta government wants lifted. But there's also something called the oil tanker ban. Now, off the north coast of British Columbia, since the 1970s, there's been. been a moratorium on oil tankers putting into BC ports. And this was codified enshrined in federal law by Justin Trudeau in 2019. The concern is that if there is any kind of accident on the seas, that you would have a marine spill that would have devastating consequences for marine life off BC's coast.

Just moving LNG tankers out of Kittamat to open water is, I think, one of the longest tug escort routes in the world. BC Coastal First Nations are very adamant that that ban stay in place. And so is David E.B. the BC Premier. They're saying that lifting that will cause a whole bunch of projects in BC to fall apart. And so Danielle Smith is hoping that Prime Minister Mark Carney is going to take away these nine bad laws before this mid-November deadline. Before breakup. Okay.

That's right. So Daniel Smith has been talking about a new pipeline for months, so this is not an out-of-the-blue idea. But this past week, BC Premier David E.B. has been very vocal about his disapproval. What's behind his response? Yeah. So what's been happening is we've been asking David E.B. Ever since Daniel Smith started talking up another pipeline, and for months his answer has been, well, look, there's no proposal, so I'm not going to respond. We're not going to start a fight with Albert. again over pipelines when there isn't really anything to fight about.

So there's been this kind of polite dance to try and avoid a head-on conflict. But what happened on October 1st is Ms. Smith announced that she would be filing this application to get the project moving. And so it became much harder for David Eby to avoid the question. Do you support or do you oppose this pipeline project? Because this is a time where Canadian politicians are supposed to be all on Team Canada, working for the best interests of the nation, not just thinking about their parochial little kingdoms.

And so Mr. Eby doesn't want to be seen as opposing Alberta. He wants to be seen as part of this effort to help Canada take on the United States and find new markets for its resources. And at one point I asked him, well, look, the reason we're still asking is because you haven't given a clear answer. And, you know, why won't you just say whether, or not you'll support this application or whether you'll oppose it. And he finally got a little bit frustrated,

but he did get a little closer to a clear answer. I am being polite. There is no project. There is no bridge to cross, unless the Albertan government and the federal Canadian government are committing billions of taxpayer dollars to build this project. And if that is the plan, then they should be transparent about it.

Don't mistake my politeness. for weakness on protecting our economy and our coast. And something he said actually in a Twitter video statement, actually, is he's called this project fictional and a fantasy. Why is he framing it this way? Well, his underlying point is that there is no viable project for oil, that the reason there's no private sector proponents is because there isn't really a market and isn't economic

and it doesn't make sense. And he keeps throwing up this contrast where in BC you've got tens of billions of dollars worth of private sector investments that are all getting close to final investment decisions. These are liquefied natural gas plants and a lot of critical mineral mines up in the north. So you've got some major projects here in BC that BC would very much like to have fast track through the major projects office. and they're saying, you know, why are we arguing about a pipeline that doesn't have an economic case, doesn't have a business case, when there are all these other things that we could be doing that could be helping the Canadian economy at large. And my understanding also, this kind of goes back to the oil tanker ban, right? So is there a fear that removal of the tanker ban could create a chill on these other projects that BC is currently planning?

This is the thing. You've got a lot of, so phase one of LNG Canada just came online in July, and so they are now, starting to send these massive tankers, these carriers carrying liquefied natural gas out of the port of Kittamat and along that long route, it's about almost 300 kilometers just to get to open water. And they have a lot of support from First Nations. And there are First Nations that are advocating their own LNG projects. And you have First Nations that are willing to support opening up all kinds of new mines in the North. But what the Coastal First Nations have said is we're willing to accept this kind of tanker traffic, LNG, and all the extra development that goes

with that. But that's contingent on the oil tanker ban staying in place. If you lift the oil tanker ban, they are going to reconsider their support for some of the things that BC is already doing. So is the sense here that if this tanker ban is not removed, that this pipeline can't move forward? Yeah, the tanker ban is a linchpin for the route that Daniel Smith is proposing right now, which is going across B.C.'s north and getting to either Kittamat or Prince Rupert ports. If that ban remains in place, then they would, Alberta would definitely have to rethink the entire project and look at another southern route, in which case you're talking about what tripling the TMX pipeline instead of building a new one.

We'll be right back. So this week, Daniel Smith said it's ultimately Ottawa's responsibility to build pipelines across provincial lines and that it's, quote, the prime minister's job to show some courage. Is it true that the federal government needs to be involved? Like, how does that work? Yeah, absolutely. The federal government is responsible for energy. projects and infrastructure that crosses provincial boundaries. So pipelines. So the prime minister can say yes. I think this pipeline is in the national interest. He can direct the major projects

office or have the major projects office seek to advance it quickly. So this is ultimately a federal decision whether to give this project of Daniel Smith a green light. But BC will still be required to sign off on a multitude of permits and they may be subject to some vigorous scrutiny. So there's that idea that you can still put up hurdles and maybe not stop a pipeline, but certainly make it more difficult. But the biggest clout is First Nations. They have constitutionally protected rights. And as well, both the federal government and the BC government are committed to undrip, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. And what that means is they are obliged to provide more than just some kind of perfunctory consultation with First Nations,

they're supposed to seek free, prior, and informed consent. Now, that can be overruled, but not easily. So it's a very high bar. And I know that Daniel Smith has pointed out that some First Nations do support another oil pipeline, but she does not have at this point anything close to any kind of consent from coastal first nations. And that will be, at the end, that was what killed the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project. So that kind of hurdle is significant. And that's, it's not something that Daniel Smith can make demands of Mark Carney and expect him to be able to clear it away. It'll still be there. What I find interesting also is that there seems to be support from Canadians. There was an Enveronics poll back from late July that found that three quarters of Canadians

are in favor of building a new oil pipeline to the west or east coast. I actually thought that was pretty surprising to me. But does that not make this project more appealing to be approved by the major project's office? Yes, I think the idea that there's broad support for developing Canada's resources. And then there's certainly it's not only Alberta that sees the need to develop Alberta oil for the benefit of the country. And I think that's why David E.B. had tried very hard to avoid getting into a direct confrontation with Daniel Smith over this is because he recognizes that if BC is seen as just being selfish in this fight, that it's going to be on the losing end of this. But there is also a question of, well, what if you have a bunch of projects in British Columbia that are worth tens of billions of billion? of dollars, and that is a benefit to not just to BC, but to all of Canada, because BC pays

into Confederation, that you've got those projects at risk. If suddenly BC is finding that their support from First Nations for LNG, for example, is drying up because the tanker ban is being lifted, and the prospect of oil tankers now changes the equation on the coast, those final investment decisions in things like the expansion of LNG Canada might be at risk. So that's the argument BC is making is that it's not just about Alberta, it's about Canada's economy where you've got a bunch of projects that are actually on the cusp of being approved, projects that are shovel-ready with tens of billions of dollars worth of private sector investments already lined up. And if you put that at risk for a pipeline that does not have a business plan, does not have private sector proponents willing to put their money in because they're not convinced that it's doable, then the equation is something that is kind of a bird in the hand for Canada is being given up.

You know, on the note about, you know, BC, quote-unquote, being selfish, we also had Premier Saskatchewan, Scott Moe, talking about how it's not BC's code. it's Canada's. Yes. Certainly, BC has some major port access that all of Canada benefits from. One of the projects that is kind of in the works right now is a big expansion of the port of Prince Rupert, which would allow more potash from Saskatchewan

to reach Asian markets. So there's definitely a national stake in what happens in our ports, and it's not just Alberta that wants to get their products out to Asia. And BC has long been sort of positioning itself as the gateway for Canada's products to reach Asian markets. So there is a responsibility there for BC to try and make sure that all of Canada benefits from those projects. But there's also an understanding that there's a slightly different dynamic here.

First Nations, for the most part, don't have treaties in BC. So in order to build something, we've got to deal with Aboriginal rights and title in a way that isn't necessarily as complex. in other parts of the country. We have more than 200 First Nations here in B.C. So a pipeline route requires a lot of consent from a lot of different communities. There's no one person that can say, yes, First Nations are on board for something.

There's a lot of work to be done on that front. On the sense of nation building, right, because it's really interesting what's going on here with this pipeline proposal. And Danielle Smith seems to be framing it as kind of like a test. And she used some language that kind of made me think about Alberta separation. This is a test of whether Canada works as a country. Because if we can't build with a collaboration of the federal government and between provinces,

if it's everybody gets to get their products going to market except Alberta, that's not a country. I just wonder, like, does Carney have to choose between Alberta and BC here? And what happens if Carney fails this test? I think, yes, Daniel Smith has, you know, she's talked about. allowing or helping, you know, put forward a referendum on separatism in Alberta. She has used that as kind of a wedge here. She's called David E. Be un-Canadian for not getting on board and supporting this pipeline. So she's certainly framed it as a test of Canada's Confederation. And that's why I think it's a difficult task for Arc Carney and for

David Eby to say if they don't support this in the end, if they don't lift that tanker ban, if they don't do all the conditions, meet all the conditions that Alberta has set out, they have to be able to convince Canadians that there is a good reason that is in the national interest to do so. And if that means that other projects don't get built, if things fall apart in BC that are actually also in the national interest, then that's the argument that they've got to fall back on. So how likely is it that this pipeline will get approved, let alone built? I think I, you know, we're batting 50-50. Is that how it works? My sports analogies are not great. You're trying. You've got Northern Gateway fell apart. TmX got built only after the federal government stepped in, bought the pipeline, and spent $34 billion worth of public tax dollars.

So the odds of another pipeline getting built right now, I would say based on those, are not great. However, we're in different times. There is a national consensus around the idea that Canada needs to make some changes and make some pivots with its economy and that that supports getting some major projects built that might in other times have been opposed. So there's that. I do think there's a lot that Alberta is asking for before. a cup. We'll have to watch very closely to see how Mr. Carney responds to that. Is he willing to tear up that tanker ban that has been in place essentially since the 1970s? And that has

become an important part of the tradeoffs that Coastal First Nations have been willing to make to allow resource development off the B.C. coast, which again, have implications for all of Canada. Okay, Jesse, we'll leave it there. Thanks so much for being on the show. Thanks, Cheryl. That was Justine Hunter, the globe's B.C. politics reporter. That's it for today. I'm Cheryl Sutherland. Our producers are Madeline White, Michal Stein, and Ali Graham. David Crosby edits the show.

Adrian Chung is our senior producer, and Angela Pichenza is our executive editor. Thanks so much for listening, and I'll talk to you soon.